Does Jesus Predict His Return in the Gospels? (Mark 8.38) | Murray Smith

Did Jesus predict His second coming — or was He speaking about His ascension in Mark 8:38? In this episode of Exploring the Language of Scripture, Daniel Mikkelsen — founder of NT Greek Tutoring and PhD candidate in New Testament — sits down with Murray Smith, lecturer in biblical theology at Christ College, Sydney, to examine one of the most debated questions in Gospel scholarship: what did Jesus mean when He spoke about the Son of Man coming in His Father's glory?

The traditional interpretation holds that Jesus is prophesying His second coming. But scholars like R.T. France, N.T. Wright, and Michael Bird argue Jesus is speaking about His ascension and heavenly enthronement, not His future return to earth. This reading claims Daniel 7:13 describes the Son of Man going to the Ancient of Days in heaven, not coming from heaven to earth.

Murray walks through the Greek text of Mark 8:38, the Old Testament allusions to Daniel 7:13 and Zechariah 14:5, and Mark's Gospel context to show why the traditional interpretation remains compelling.

This matters beyond academics. If Jesus didn't prophesy His return, where does the doctrine come from? And what does His promised return mean for how we live today?

📘 Free Greek Guide — 'Why Learning Greek Could Be a Struggle and How to Move Forward' Discover common pitfalls in learning biblical Greek and Daniel's three-step framework to read with confidence. 👉 https://ntgreektutoring.com/why-struggle-with-greek

Don't Miss the Next Episode: 

Daniel welcomes John Nelson to discuss Jesus' physical appearance in the Gospels — what can we know, and why does it matter?

Chapters

00:00 Coming Up...

01:05 Meet Murray Smith: Gospel Scholar and Pastor

05:37 How Biblical Languages Opened Up Scripture

10:14 The Power of Slowing Down with Greek

15:21 How to Spot Old Testament Allusions

20:25 Finding A Potential Hidden Chiasm in the Greek of Mark

25:57 The Big Debate Explained: Second Coming or Heavenly Enthronement?

34:02 The Advantage of Arguing for An Heavenly Enthronement

43:06 The Importance of Daniel 7 in Acts 1: What Is Going on?

45:32 Unpacking Daniel 7: Heaven to Earth or Earth to Heaven?

53:19 Mark 8.38 in light of Daniel 7 and Zechariah 14

01:00:30 Does "This Generation" Mean Jesus Was Wrong?

01:04:53 What About Mark 9:1? Some Will See the Kingdom

01:10:17 How Does "Coming of the Son of Man" Function Across Mark?

01:12:52 Solving Mark 13: One Or Two Events?

01:19:57 How Matthew and Luke Handle the Same Material

01:25:20 Kingdom of God: Where the King Goes?

01:30:37 Practical Application: Living for His Return

Music Credits: 

Music from #Uppbeat 🔗 https://uppbeat.io/t/all-good-folks/aspire

If you enjoyed this episode of Exploring the Language of Scripture, please consider becoming an Explorer! Your support helps keep the podcast ad-free, allows us to bring in more guests, and enhances the content we create. By joining our Explorer community, you’ll receive exclusive benefits, including Q&As, priority for Greek tutoring applications, and discounts on tutoring. Explore more and join the Explorer programme here: Become an Explorer. 

Podcast Keywords:
biblical languages, New Testament, Old Testament, Christ, bible study,  Relationship with God, learn biblical languages, Biblical Theology, Christianity, Covenants, New covenant, old covenant, language acquisition, Biblical Greek, Biblical Hebrew.

Transcript

0:00

Is the Son of Man coming from heaven to earth in his second coming or is he going from earth to heaven in his ascension? If Jesus is here speaking about his ascension and heavenly enthronement, then he's speaking about that here in Mark 8.38 and in Mark 13.26 and in Mark 14.62. And therefore, you're going to be hard pressed to find places in the Gospel of Mark where Jesus prophesies his own return. That in fact is the view that NT Wright has championed. He says that there are no references to Jesus' second coming in the gospels. Jesus does not prophesy his own second coming according to Wright. You can find son of man in a number of places, but son of man plus the verb ἔρχομαι(erchomai) you'll find that only in one verse in the whole of the Old Testament in the Greek translation. And that one verse is Daniel 7.13. In his kindness, we have Jesus' own words, our Lord's own promise that he will return. So if you've been ever wondering what Jesus meant when he spoke about his coming, then stay tuned. Welcome back to another episode of Exploring the Language of Scripture, brought to you by NT Greek Tutoring, the place for personalized Greek learning in your spare time. I'm your host, Daniel Mikkelsen, the founder of NT Greek Tutoring and a PhD candidate in New Testament at the University of Edinburgh. And this podcast exists to make gems from biblical studies accessible to everyday Christians and show how the biblical languages opens up scripture. Our aim is to increase your love for God and his word so that you become more joyful witnesses for his mission. And today I'm delighted and honored to be joined by Murray Smith on the podcast, Murray's lecture in biblical theology and exegesis at Christ College in Australia. He serves as an elder in Hornsby Presbyterian Church and previously past at Kirkplace Presbyterian Church. Murray has published widely across New Testament studies, both academically and more popular em research. And one of his Main areas of interest is Jesus and the Gospel and Biblical eschatology, which makes him ideal for today's topic as we will be discussing a hotly debated topic in the Gospels, namely, did Jesus know about his second coming in the Synoptic Gospels? We're particularly focusing on Mark chapter 8 verse 38, em and what Jesus meant when he spoke about the Son of Man coming in his Father's glory. is Jesus referring to his future return and second coming, or as many major scholars have argued, is he speaking about instead of a heavenly enthronement. So if you've been ever wondering what Jesus meant when he spoke about his coming, then stay tuned. m And on more personal note, Murray and I, met at the, summer at the Tyndale Fellowship and had many good conversations and He also presented a most exciting paper about this topic we talked about in Mark 8, And we also ran into each other in Boston at the more recent SBL. And so I'm very grateful that he wanted to come and share some of his insights with us today. So it's a great pleasure to have him on the podcast, Murray. Welcome here. Thanks Daniel, it's great to be here with you. Looking forward to our conversation. Yeah, absolutely, me too. Anything else you want to add before we jump into some questions? uh So maybe just to explain, Christ College, we're the uh seminary of the Presbyterian Church of Australia in Sydney, New South Wales. So I've been teaching there for 15 years and it's a great privilege to be part of raising up the next generation of pastors and teachers and other leaders for the Presbyterian Church especially in Australia but also for the work of the Gospel around the world. that's where I am. I get to teach across the whole canon of Scripture. Genesis through to Revelation, which is also a real privilege, focusing on New Testament and especially in the Gospels. So glad to be able to talk about the Gospel of Mark today with you. Excellent. It's a great privilege to be able to teach all the scripture that's usually not. Many lecturers joy to be able to do that. Either they don't feel comfortable with it or they're not allowed to do it. Yes, no, really is a great privilege. My PhD is in New Testament, focused in the Gospels, but we're a relatively small school, as the Americans would say, a small college, as we would say in Australia. And so when I joined the team, they needed somebody to fill in some Old Testament gaps, and I was very happy to do so. it's actually been really good for me, and I hope also for my students, because as you work through the whole canon, and I do it every year, Genesis to Revelation. It reinforces the way in which all of scripture hangs together and is one coherent narrative revealing one plan of salvation focused on Christ and the Gospel. And seeing all of the connections, Old Testament to New Testament, that's been really rich. So I think more of us should teach across the canon. More New Testament people need to know the Old Testament well, and more Old Testament people need to know the New Testament well. Absolutely, absolutely. I agree very much with that. We should really focus on everything. Because if we really believe that it's all God's Word, we should read it all and study it all. Yeah. So thank you for those notes. I think that's very encouraging. But... As biblical language is the foundational of this podcast, let's start with your personal journey. How did you get into the study of biblical languages? Yeah, I think it was just what we've been talking about, studying God's Word. I fell in love with Scripture as a 16, 17, 18 year old. I'd grown up in a Christian family. That was a great privilege for which I'm really thankful to God. And grew up in the church. And I was taught to have a high view of Scripture. But it was at those late teenage years where... think I have to say God was at work in my life by His Spirit and just grew in me a love for His Word and I found myself devouring it and just couldn't get enough. And so as I was reading more and more of the Bible and started reading through the Bible year by year, I just wanted to go deeper and languages was the next step. You have these questions. What does that mean and why does that translation, you read one translation then read a different translation, why are those two translations different? And so that surfaced a lot of questions for me about what was going on underneath the translations. So I started with Greek and actually did classical Greek first and then Koiné New Testament Greek and then added Hebrew to that. and then had the chance to do some Latin as well, which I don't know if you can call that a biblical language or not. uh That's right, exactly. Yeah, and a little bit, my Aramaic is not great, but I've had to do a little bit of that in order to work in Daniel, where I've done some work. So, it's just a real privilege to be able to read the scriptures in the original. It doesn't answer all your questions. In fact, in some ways it just raises more questions. But they're hopefully sharper, better questions. So that's been part of my journey. I've now been teaching Greek at Christ College for 15 years. And as they say, the best way to learn something is to teach it. And so the experience of teaching year by year, I'm always learning new things as students ask questions. And then I also still have the privilege of teaching some Old Testament in Hebrew as well, so that my Hebrew is not as good as my Greek, but it does force me to keep that up to date as well. So that's bit of my story with the languages. Yeah, I think that's a great story and it resonates with my own in some ways because I also just when fell in love with Jesus, just wanted to get to know him more and my focus on evangelism was I wanted to get deeper into the scriptures and languages was like I needed to learn Greek and I'm just very excited about that. your story does resonate with my own. I love this quote from Martin Luther in his address to the nobility of the German nation where he encourages them to set up schools where all the children in Germany can learn the biblical languages. And one of his arguments is, one of the lines I love from that address is that as dear as the gospel is to us, so let us contend with the languages. And the insight there is that the theology is in the grammar of scripture, the gospel is in the grammar of scripture. It's through the word that God has given us, originally in Hebrew and Aramaic and Greek, that the good news of our salvation comes to us. So, as dear as the gospel is to us, says Luther, so hard let us contend with the languages. But I like that he says contend with the languages, because it is hard work. And it doesn't come easily, particularly for us in the modern world, I think maybe worse in Australia than for you in Europe, where we're not used to learning languages. And so we do need to contend with the challenge of learning them, but the promise is the gospel becomes clearer and sharper as we do. Thank you for sharing that quote. I think I've mentioned that I've forgotten where it was coming from, but I've mentioned that Luther said this, just forgot where it was from. So thank you for pointing me back to the original source. Although he translated the Bible into German, he was very serious about we needed to learn the languages because that's where the gospel lives. Yeah, so maybe it's we could go into like how has it been reading the biblical language? How have they opened up scripture for you? Have you experienced that? Yeah, I'll say two things. The more general thing is it slows you down in reading scripture. That's one of the great benefits that I've found in reading the scriptures in the original languages is I have to, using Luther's phrase, I have to contend with every word. Because it's not my native language, my mother tongue, I can't just gloss over it. I have to ask, what's that word doing there? In a way, when you read in your mother tongue, often you gloss over things, particularly if you're reading something familiar, uh like parts of the Bible that you've heard your whole life, or you've read multiple times, that you can gloss over the details and therefore miss things. And reading in the originals forces you to slow down. and notice each word and think about the syntax of the sentence. What's the main verb here? How are those other subordinate verbs related to the main verb? What's going on in this sentence? And just that process of slowing down, I've found time and time again I notice things that I might not have noticed. It's there in the English translation. It's not as if it's something that's not there. It's just that I wasn't reading the English very carefully and reading the Greek as has forced me to read more carefully because I have to slow down. So that's one thing. So I think if you read the English carefully or whatever language is your mother tongue, then we're very blessed to have very good translations. And so we should have confidence. We should have confidence in our translations. And for those who don't have the languages, they can rely on their translations because in God's kindness, we have good translations. Hmm. other ways of slowing down and reading carefully. For example, reading two different English translations will show up things, you'll notice things that are slightly different in one translation over the other and again that's a good exercise to help you notice things in the text. But even better, learn the languages and you'll have that forced slowing down. The other thing is that there are some things that that are communicated more clearly in the original than in some of our translations. So to give just one example, one that stands out to me is in the famous word of Jesus after his resurrection at the end of Matthew's Gospel, which we often call the Great Commission, where he says, authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me, therefore go and make disciples of all nations baptising them in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit and teaching them to obey everything I've commanded you. The... in the English translation I've got the NIV there, that I just read, and I'm not picking on the NIV. I think most of the major English translations have the same, yet the ESV says, therefore and make disciples of all nations. When you take a look at the original you realise, actually there's only one verb in the imperative, it's μαθητεύσατε (mathēteusate) there's one command there, which is the make disciples. And that highlights for us that's the main command. And then we've got some participles that are associated with the command. So, πορευθέντες (poreuthentes) is as you go, make disciples. And then βαπτίζοντες (baptizontes), baptizing. And then διδάσκοντες (didaskontes), teaching. And these are the means through which we make disciples. We make disciples as we go and by baptizing and by teaching. And so all of those participles, there's a sense in which they are commands, they have imperatival force, we must go and we must baptise and we must teach, but they're all means to the end of the main game here, which is making disciples. And looking at the Greek and noticing that there's just one imperative in Jesus' word there, really highlights that. This is the main command, it's make disciples, and helps us to understand what he's instructing us. with greater clarity. Yeah, yeah, that's a very helpful point. yeah, so in the sense that the imperatival ideas is because of the main idea that to make disciples, so μαθητεύσατε (mathēteusate) em is that that's why there's also an imperative to go and to baptize and to teach. Yeah, so yeah, I think that that's a very helpful point. Learning New Testament Greek can be a real challenge. If that's been your experience, I've put together a free PDF guide called Why Learning Greek Could Be a Struggle and How to Move Forward. Inside you'll find the most common pitfalls and my simple three step framework to help you start reading Greek with more confidence. Get your free copy today by clicking the link in the description below or the pinned comment. Now back to the episode. Yeah, so as we you've already been giving examples, maybe you can give another one of things that you have seen in the original that wasn't available to you in translation. Yes, let me think of another example. Probably what I'll say is, and this may take us into the main thing we're going to talk about today in Mark 8, is working in the originals allows you to have more precision and confidence in identifying where the New Testament is using the Old Testament. So often you'll read something and you think, oh, that reminds me of an Old Testament passage, and you go and look at the Old Testament passage. Mm. And in an English translation, you can see some correspondence in the language between the Old Testament passage and the New Testament passage. But in order to really test that, is this New Testament passage citing from or alluding to the Old Testament passage? To really test it, you need to see, is the New Testament passage using the same words as are there in the Old Testament? Now, there's all sorts of complexity in that, because the New Testament in Greek is citing or alluding to the Old Testament originally given in Hebrew and so we've got questions about whether the New Testament author is doing his own translation of the Hebrew Old Testament or whether he's relying on an existing translation in the Septuagint but then there are multiple Greek translations, old Greek translations and so which of those does he have before him or does he have one before him that we no longer have before us? So there's all sorts of complexities. Yeah. question of how is the New Testament using the Old Testament. But working in the languages is what will enable you to see that. And so to take us to the concrete example in Mark 8.38 and then the other places in the Gospels where Jesus talks about the coming of the Son of Man. When we see there that the phrase, ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου the Son of Man, and then we see the verb, ἔρχομαι (erchomai) coming, And that's what occurs in Mark 8.38 and Mark 13.26 and Mark 14.62. You have this title or semi-title, Son of Man, ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου. And then you also have that paired with the verb ἔρχομαι (erchomai) If you search the whole of the Old Testament, you only find that combination in one verse. It's really quite remarkable. You can find Son of Man in a number of places. But Son of Man plus the verb ἔρχομαι (erchomai). you'll find that only in one verse in the whole of the Old Testament in the Greek translation. And that one verse is Daniel 7.13. And so that gives us a high degree of confidence, I would say, that this is a deliberate allusion on Mark's part, as he reports Jesus teaching, a deliberate allusion to that particular verse in the Old Testament, Daniel 7.13. And that one's not controversial. And even if you just had the English, you can hear the allusion, you can hear the, resonances of Daniel 7.13. But it's when you look at the language and you notice those details you can have a high degree of confidence. And in other cases you might think, oh I wonder if the New Testament is alluding to the Old and you go and you look at the language and it's different words and that makes you, gives you some pause. Maybe the connection is not as strong as I might have first thought. So it's a good way of testing the New Testament use of the Old. Yeah, yes. Yeah, just been talking to you on the previous episode, talk to Ed Glenny about how one Peter is using the Septuagint And you see lots of that like the verbal overlap, when is an allusion and when is it an actual quotation, where we're probably dealing with an allusion here in Mark 8.38, rather than a direct quotation. But that's fascinating. I think that, yeah, that's one of the things, that's one of the reasons why we should learn the languages or encourage people to learn languages that you can see if the author was thinking that way. Is he, he wants you to think about that text. m Yeah. Yeah, and if he's using language that doesn't occur in what you thought was the source text, then that will give you some pause. Maybe there is still an allusion there, but it's weaker or it's softer, the volume is lower. Whereas if there's that verbal overlap, then I can make a strong case that the author wants us to hear that allusion to the Old Testament passage. Yeah, yeah, that's very helpful in thinking about, you know, when does an author think about the Hebrew Bible or the Old Testament. Yeah, maybe you spend a lot of time reading through the Greek of the Gospels, maybe in particular, without giving too much away of what we are going to talk about in a moment. We already seeing it in the conversation. Have you seen something about Jesus' ministry in the Greek that enhanced your understanding that you might not have seen translation? Hmm, good. Yeah, so here's another one that I've just enjoyed recently. I'm writing a commentary on the Gospel of Mark and I'm nearly finished chapter one. It's very slow work. And reading the end of, or the middle section in Mark chapter one verses 21 to 28, I began to notice some lexical repetitions happening. in that unit, Mark 1, 21-28. It's where Jesus heals a man with an unclean spirit in the synagogue in Capernaum. It's Jesus' first recorded miracle in the Gospel of Mark. It's very significant because it's Mark's first introduction to us of the kinds of mighty works, the miracles that Jesus did, the acts of power. And here it's an act of power. He shows his authority over the forces of evil. over the evil one and his demons. And he shows his authority in a way that brings salvation to those who are enslaved to the evil spirits. And so this man who has an evil spirit is set free and Jesus therefore demonstrates his authority. And of course you get all of that in English. What I noticed as I was just working through verse by verse is that there are really interesting uh semantic lexical and semantic overlaps in this passage that create what I think is a chiasm, that there's this pattern of the beginning of the story matches the end of the story, so you get an A and an A1 line at the top and the bottom, where they go into the synagogue in Capernaum, and then the report about him goes out everywhere, and the language there is... going in and going out, there's correspondences in the language. then just inside that frame in verses 22 and matched by verse 27, we have this repetition of language around teaching and authority. He was teaching with authority. And we get διδάσκω (didaskō) and διδαχή (didachē) and then... ἐξουσία (exousia) as the authority word and all of that is repeated in verse 27. So verse 22 matches verse 27. And then we come inside that and we get mentions of the unclean spirit in verse 23 and then in verse 26. And so they're matching each other. And so we've got these matched pairs in the outer frame of it and then just inside that and then again further inside until we get to the middle of what I think is this chiasm. And we have for the first time the name of Jesus mentioned. and then we have the declaration of this um unclean spirit, I know who you are, the Holy One of God. And so the structuring that Mark has set up for us with this chiastic structure leads our eyes into the middle so that we notice and focus on this declaration of the evil spirit, the Holy One of God. So I've given that as an experimental conference paper. I haven't yet had a chance to write that up and get it peer reviewed. So maybe I'm seeing something that's not there. But it was paying close attention to the Greek that helped me to start to think, oh, I wonder if Mark has structured this as a chiasm. And the lexical repetitions are what clued me into it. So yeah, things like that. is definitely very interesting. I've not thought about it, but there is definitely the lexical repetition. And Jesus is in the middle and he is the holy one of God. Although it's the demon saying it, which Jesus normally doesn't like. em although in the Gospel of Mark it's the demons who first recognise who he is, here and then in chapter 3 and chapter 5. it's the disciples who are the dull ones. That's right, exactly. They eventually come to see with Peter's confession at Caesarea Philippi in chapter 8, but even then Peter sees that Jesus is the Christ but doesn't understand what it means for him to be the Christ and that he's come to suffer and to die. I don't know how much time you've got, but we could keep going on the title Holy One of God because... um there's some discussion about where does that come from and I think having a close look at the Greek also gives us some clues there that maybe it's coming from Psalm 89 where the Lord's anointed David is the Holy One and David and his descendants is the Holy One and in Psalm 89 the Holy One is cut off and so if there's an illusion there in what the demon says you are the Holy One of God, then he's anticipating that Jesus is the Messiah, the Lord's anointed, who's going to be cut off. And so this would be the demon, you know, recognising the fate of Jesus, the destiny of Jesus as the one who's going to suffer and die. Perhaps not realising that that's going to mean destruction for the powers of evil. you know, that's all more detail we could talk about if we had more time. Yeah, that's interesting. Thanks for mentioning it. Yeah, but we might want to step into Mark 8. But before we go into the more detailed discussion going on in Mark 8.38 I might um just, before I ask my question, I might just want to read it. A fairly literal translation I made. em For whoever is ashamed, of me and my words in this unbelieving and sinful generation also the son of man will be ashamed of him when he comes in his father's glory with all his holy angels. So if someone is not aware of this particular discussion about Mark 8.38 and whether Jesus knew about his future coming in the Synoptics, Can you explain what the debate is about? What is a stake? Yeah, it is quite a significant debate. It hasn't uh always reached the level of church audiences and for my money that's not a bad thing. so the long established traditional interpretation that you'll find in the church fathers and in the reformers and all the way down through church history is that when in the Gospels Jesus speaks about his coming as the Son of Man. the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven. He's speaking about his second coming, his final return in power and glory at the end of the age to judge and to reign. That's been the traditional understanding. In the Gospel of Mark, Jesus speaks like that only three times. Here in Mark 8.38, then again in Mark 13.26, and then again in Mark 14. 62 when he's responding to the high priest at his trial. And so three times we have the son of man coming, the son of man will come, you'll see the son of man coming on the clouds. And yeah, so the traditional understanding is that Jesus is there speaking about his second coming. There has been a minority report through the history of the church which has now become quite prominent in a lot of evangelical scholarship that rereads the coming of the Son of Man as the going of the Son of Man. You'll see the Son of Man going on the clouds or coming on the clouds to God in heaven. And that reading seeks to reverse the direction of travel. That this is not the Son of Man returning from heaven in his second coming. This is the Son of Man going to heaven coming on the clouds to God in heaven, and therefore it's a reference to his ascension and his vindication after his suffering. And that's been quite popular, particularly, I think it's especially popular in British evangelical scholarship. There are some outside the UK who hold this view, particularly in Australia, less so in America. I'm not sure what the case is in... in Denmark, in Scandinavian scholarship. In Germany, I don't think it's made much... uh Jeremiah's actually, Joachim Jeremiah's did hold something similar to this view, so there are versions of it in German scholarship as well. But it's particularly prominent in British scholarship and the big scholarly names attached to it are R.T. France, who really popularised this in his commentaries on the Gospel of Mark and the Gospel of Matthew. And then also more recently, N.T. Wright. who's argued for this kind of view in a lot of his works, especially his book, Jesus and the Victory of God. That the coming of the Son of Man is his ascension or his vindication. And then Wright will add, and that was manifested in the destruction of Jerusalem. That the people in Jesus' generation saw that he had come on the clouds to the Ancient of Days in heaven, not because they saw him personally, but because they saw the evidence that he was now the ascended Lord in the fact that the city that opposed him, Jerusalem, has been destroyed. the coming of the Son of Man is his ascension, his vindication, and the evidence of that is Jerusalem has been destroyed in AD 70. So that's become quite a, you know, there's all sorts of various versions of that reading. But that's the debate. Is the Son of Man coming? from heaven to earth in his second coming? Or is he going from earth to heaven in his ascension? Hmm. It's very interesting because I don't think it's particularly popular in Danish scholarship. I could know I'm not a gospel scholar, so there might be people who think that. it's not what I was taught in my undergrad in my gospel courses. em So I did do my undergrad in a fairly conservative place, so that might also be the reason. I don't know. em I just, it is a fairly new understanding to me. oh To me, finds a little bit peculiar. em But I think it is an interesting discussion and I'm glad that we have this discussion today. And also because I think it has some very, it's very important. think they have the implications are also quite, I think there's a lot of stake as well. Yeah. Yeah, and it's got some things, know, some reasons that make it attractive, right? Most of the people championing this reading are evangelical, they have a high view of Scripture, so they're not seeking to undermine Orthodox Christian doctrine. In fact, uh they're trying to read the Bible carefully, and as always with this kind of thing, you can make a good case. And so, probably the two reasons why it's become popular is people will say, well, there's an allusion here to Daniel 7. And in Daniel 7, the one like a son of man comes to the Ancient of Days. And so, if you assume that the Ancient of Days is God on his throne in heaven, then when the one like a son of man comes on the clouds of heaven to the Ancient of Days, you can picture that as an upward movement. and therefore see Daniel 7 as an ascension scene. And that will then influence you to read the Gospels in the same way, that when Jesus speaks about the coming of the Son of Man, he's speaking about his ascension or his heavenly enthronement, his enthronement in heaven. uh That's often the language that's used. And the other really strong argument in its favour is that in Mark 13, 26, Jesus says this, he says, the Son of Man, you'll see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven. Actually there it's in the third person. They will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory. Mark 13 26. And then a few verses later he says, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. And so if all these things includes the coming of the Son of Man, well that didn't happen. His second coming didn't happen within a generation and so Jesus was mistaken. But if the coming of Son of Man is His ascension and His heavenly enthronement, then that did happen within a generation. Jerusalem was destroyed within a generation as the evidence of that. And so all this did take place within a generation. And so that makes it quite an attractive reading because it solves that difficulty of Mark 13.30, where Jesus says this generation will not pass away. So you can make a strong argument for it. I'm not persuaded. yeah. Yeah, and it's always good to steelman the position that you disagree with. And um so but I'm not a gospel scholar, but I was being curious why this this is prominent in the Anglo-Saxon scholar, like you mentioned NT Wright already, but I believe Mike Bird is also your fellow countryman is also arguing this view. Yeah. Yes, that's right. It's hard to know why a view becomes popular and you don't know inside people's minds and hearts. so I can't understand or explain why other people might hold a particular view, except for those strengths that I've just noted. You can use this reading to help make sense of Daniel 7, if you read Daniel 7 as an ascension scene. It helps solve the difficulty of why Jesus says all these things will not pass away until everything has taken place. I think probably within gospel scholarship and historical Jesus research there's been a big influence in the last generation on understanding Jesus in his Jewish context and therefore highlighting the way in which Jesus speaks to his first century Jewish contemporaries. and prophesies the destruction of Jerusalem and God's judgment on Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple which did occur in AD 70. And so this interpretation tends to highlight and emphasize that aspect of Jesus' ministry that he prophesied the destruction of Jerusalem and it brings the coming of the Son of Man together with that emphasis. So I think that's maybe another reason for its popularity that it Yeah, you can make an argument. Again, I'm not convinced, but you can make an argument that this is a more Jewish reading, it locates Jesus more firmly in his Jewish context. Yeah, that seems to be what R. T. France is kind of like banging on about. So that's what he seems to be like. I he says this in commentary, I was reading as I was preparing for this, and I think he says, if I can recall it correctly, that to his contemporary readers, they would have understood it as an heavenly enthronment or something like that. I might be paraphrasing what he's arguing, but... No, no, that's right, France and Wright and others as well, but Wright is particularly strident about it. Wright says, is the common first century reading of Daniel 7, that it's a heavenly enthronement scene, and therefore we should presume that Jesus reads it in the same way as his first century Jewish contemporaries as an enthronement scene, and therefore applies it to his own future heavenly enthronement. Again, I think that can be challenged, but that's certainly part of the... the argument. Yeah, but so maybe I would be curious about what what is the evidence that that NT right then brings to the to the table saying this is the common reading. Because you can't you can obviously just say it and but then if it's not backed up by any evidence then then it doesn't hold. I'm assuming has some something to say. yes. Unfortunately, the evidence is fairly thin, ah that it was a common first century Jewish reading. There is some evidence in Josephus, that Josephus refers to a prophecy of Daniel that is applied to the destruction of the temple. And so there's some evidence in its favour. The preponderance of evidence, however, is on the other side. And this paper that you heard on Mark 8 at Tyndale Fellowship comes out of my doctoral work on this particular question. And I've got a whole chapter, if people are interested, I can give you the link at the end, a whole chapter surveying early Jewish readings of Daniel 7, and particularly when we look at the readings of Daniel 7 at Qumran amongst the Dead Sea Scrolls. Mm-mm. then in 1 Enoch 37-71, the similitudes of Enoch, and then also in 4th Ezra, and to a lesser extent 2nd Baruch, there's a, I've argued at least, a fairly strong trajectory of reading Daniel 7, not as a heavenly enthronement scene, but as a vision of God coming to earth to execute final judgement. One of the Qumran scrolls in fact makes that very explicit. that the mighty one came down from heaven and set up his throne and the books were opened and judgment was issued. So I think the preponderance of evidence shows that the Jews in the first century tended to read Daniel 7 not as a scene of the Son of Man ascending to heaven, but as a scene of God coming to earth to judge his enemies. And that then is going to be consistent with the way I think we should read Jesus' use of this in the Gospels. Hmm. Yeah, that's very helpful. And everybody agrees that this is an allusion to Daniel 7 is happening, as you mentioned already. But we maybe already talked a little bit about it, but maybe we should flesh it out. What does it mean for the understanding of the text and the gospel to say, it is a heavenly enthronement? Yeah, yes, this is worth drawing out a little bit. If Jesus is speaking about His ascension and heavenly enthronement, then He's speaking about that here in Mark 8.38 and in Mark 13.26 and in Mark 14.62, and therefore you're going to be hard pressed to find places in the Gospel of Mark where Jesus prophesies His own return. Because these are the Traditionally, these have been the places we've looked to see Jesus' prophecy of His second coming. And if these are not references to the second coming, then maybe there aren't many others, maybe there aren't any others. And that, in fact, is the view that N.T. Wright has championed. He says that there are no references to Jesus' second coming in the Gospels. Jesus does not prophesy His own second coming according to Wright. Now, of course, he's orthodox on the question of the Second Coming. He does believe that Christ will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, as we confess in the Nicene Creed and the Apostles' Creed. But he gets that doctrine not from Jesus' teaching in the Gospels, but from the teaching of Paul in the letters and from the Book of Revelation and from the Book of Acts. And so, in his comments on Acts chapter 1, verses 9 to 11, where the two angels say to the disciples as they're looking up to heaven, Jesus has ascended, and the angels say he'll come again in the same way as you saw him go. Wright says that's the first indication that Jesus will return, because there are no indications in the Gospels and therefore no indications from Jesus himself. And I think that's a fairly significant implication that Jesus didn't prophesy on return. Yeah, it's so big. Yeah, because where does it then come from? There, this view. I had a really good conversation with NT Wright when he came out to Sydney when I was in the early phases of my PhD research and I had read his work and at that stage was mostly convinced by it and so I asked him exactly that question. If Jesus didn't speak of His own Second Coming, how does Paul reach the conclusion so quickly in Paul's earliest letters, at least some of them in 1 and 2 Thessalonians? that Jesus will return. And Wright said, that's a very good question, you should work on that. Which was really helpful. And so I did, and unfortunately I came to the conclusion that the reason Paul got there so quickly is because Jesus himself did in fact prophesy his own second coming. therefore I ended up disagreeing with Wright about the reading of these key verses in the Gospels and the coming of the Son of Man. Yeah. Yeah. I also noticed when he because he talks about acts and the ascension and the angel. Maybe he would like talk about the angels. Then there's the angels that have told the disciples and that's why Paul knows. Yes, correct. Yeah, and he'll talk about there's a logic that comes from the Gospels. So he says things like, it was inconceivable to the apostles that the final kingdom of God would have no place for Jesus in it. And that's a sound argument. And therefore, as they thought about the fact that the kingdom had come, but had not yet come in all its fullness, Mm. they reached the conclusion that when the kingdom comes in all its fullness, then Jesus must come to bring the kingdom in all its fullness, so Jesus must come again. And so there's a logic that identifies in Jesus' proclamation of the kingdom of God that pushed the apostles towards recognising that Jesus must come again in order to bring the fullness of God's kingdom. But that's not the same as saying that Jesus prophesied his own second coming. That's interesting. I find it's fascinating in many ways. Because both because it's new to me, but also it's not new to me because I heard your paper in Tyndale. But also because I actually think that there is a I think I agree with Tyler Hoagland that there is a reference to Daniel seven in early in Acts one, which which is kind of a problem for N.T. Wright, I think. Yeah, well, he actually appeals to Acts 1 for his reading of Daniel 7.

So, he'll say in Acts 1, 11, the angels say: 43:38

Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into heaven? This Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way as you saw him go into heaven. he was taken up into heaven in a cloud. Verse 9 ‘a cloud took him out of their sight’. so Wright says that, well, there you've got a cloud. Jesus going into heaven. So that's Daniel 7. Daniel 7 is about the Son of Man going on the clouds into heaven. So he actually uses this in support of his ascension reading. In response, I would say that, yes, there is a cloud in Acts 1, but it's really interesting that that does take Jesus out of their sight. But it's interesting what the angels say is, this Jesus who has taken up from you into heaven will come in the same way as you saw him go into heaven. And if we pay attention to the verbs there, we've got come is ἐλεύσεται, which is the future form of the verb, ἔρχομαι (erchomai). That's the same verb that occurs in Daniel 7.13 in the old Greek translation. That's the same verb that Jesus uses in the gospels for the coming of the Son of Man. He'll come in the same way as you saw him go into heaven. The verb for go there is πορεύομαι (poreuomai) And so there's two different verbs that are being used. he poreuomai'ed into heaven, if I can put it like that. πορεύομαι plus a cloud is not Daniel 7. Going into heaven with a cloud, that's not Daniel 7. ἔρχομαι (erchomai) with a cloud, that is Daniel 7. And so, against Wright's reading, I think there is an allusion to Daniel 7 here, but it's in the second coming. He will come, ἔρχομαι (erchomai), just as you saw him go, in a cloud. He'll come again in a cloud and so that fits with a return reading of Daniel 7, a descent reading of Daniel 7. Yeah, that's helpful. Yeah, so we already mentioned R.T. France and he is adamant that the scene in vision to Daniel 7 alludes to Mark 8.38. And that is not a specific event, as far as I understand him. And it has to occur in heaven. which means that it cannot refer to the second coming of Christ. And, and France then continues... to France, it rather refers to Jesus as his enthronement in heaven after he has been rejected on earth, which to him explains the language of glory, but also the term in his generation. But, thus this, how Thus this interpretation actually fits with Daniel 7 in his own context and how the illusion works in Mark 8.38. Yeah, great question. So there's a lot to get into there. So let me start with Daniel 7 and then perhaps you can tell us where to go next. yes, a lot of this rereading by France and Wright and Bird and others relies on a reading of Daniel 7 as, like we've talked about in Ascension scene, the one like a son of man comes to the Ancient of Days. And so there's an assumption that the Ancient of Days is in heaven and the son of man is coming to him. being enthroned in heaven. If we go back and look at Daniel 7 though, I think a much stronger case can be made that Daniel is presenting a vision that he saw of what I would call an eschatological theophany, an end time coming of God. Because the whole scene is set in Daniel 7 on the earth, Daniel sees visions and the visions, in his visions he sees the four winds of heaven stirring up a great sea and then four great beasts come up out of the sea and these beasts come up out of the sea and they're wreaking havoc on the land, they're on earth, these beasts. And as these four, Daniel keeps looking, these four beasts are wreaking havoc on the earth, devouring much flesh, exercising dominion. bringing suffering, all of that's happening on the earth. And then as Daniel keeps looking, verse 9, as I looked, thrones were placed. And that's really interesting language. Thrones were set up and the Ancient of Days took his seat. And you ask, where are these thrones being placed? And the assumption on Wright's reading, on France's reading, is that this is happening in heaven. But according to scripture, God's throne is already established in heaven. It has been from all eternity. God doesn't have to set up his throne in heaven. This is a new and decisive act where God is setting up his throne in a place where his rule is contested, where people are rebelling against him, where the beasts are wreaking havoc. And so he sets up his throne on the earth, I think is the better way to read it. And that's confirmed by, in the interpretation of the vision in Daniel 7 22, when Daniel says, I didn't understand what I was seeing. And so he asks the angel who explains it. And the explanation in Daniel 7, 21 and 22 is that there was war being made by the beasts against the saints, God's people, and the beast prevailed over them, verse 22, until the Ancient of Days came and judgment was given for the saints of the Most High. So the Ancient of Days comes and sets up his throne on earth. and executes judgment on the earth where the beasts have been wreaking havoc. And so then when the one like a son of man comes on the clouds of heaven, Daniel keeps looking, Daniel 7 13, and look he says with the clouds of heaven there came one like a son of man and he came to the ancient of days. He's coming from heaven to earth to receive dominion over the earth and that's what happens in verse 14. He's given dominion and glory in a kingdom where well it's It's a kingdom that replaces the kingdom of the beasts. And since the beasts have been ruling over the earth, this one, like a son of man, he's given dominion over the earth. And so, already in Daniel 7, I think we should see this as a coming from heaven to earth, as an end time coming of God, an eschatological theophany. And that, think, is the best reading of Daniel 7. That seems to be the way Daniel 7 is being read by the early Jewish texts. especially 1 Enoch and 4 Ezra and 4Q530 amongst the Dead Sea Scrolls. And so when we get to Jesus in the Gospels, I think our presumption should be that when Jesus speaks about the coming of the Son of Man, he's speaking about that same direction of travel, this coming from heaven to earth. Yeah, that's helpful. And also, I think it's very helpful in terms of understanding what's going on. And also, like, when how the book of Daniel ends, it seems like it's all about what is happening on Earth. As well as that, in the end, there should be a resurrection of the saint, of everybody, actually, in Daniel is everybody and the saints, will shine like the lights of heaven. I think that's maybe the Greek I'm quoting but I'm not sure. Yeah, Daniel 12. Yeah. Shrine like the stars. Yeah. Yeah, I think you're right. The whole book of Daniel is concerned with God's kingdom over the earth. There's a refrain through the first half of the book. The Most High rules over the kingdom of man and gives it to him he will. And God is ruling over the kingdom of Nebuchadnezzar and of Darius and Belshazzar. And the vision in Daniel 2 which is matched or the dream, Nebuchadnezzar's dream in Daniel 2, which matches the vision in Daniel 7, they're paired passages in the structure of the book. There again, it's very much concerned with the kingdom on the earth. There's the great statue that has the head of gold and then silver and then down to the feet of clay. And then a stone that's cut by no human hands, smashes this statue down and that stone... Yeah. rises to become a great kingdom on the earth, Daniel 2, 35 and 44. And so again, it's concerned with God's final kingdom over the earth. That's really the burden of the whole book of Daniel, and Daniel 7 fits within that context. Yeah. Yeah, and then also the talking about the war in heaven that supposedly happens in chapter eight as well. And it's happening from the beast is on the earth, and it's rolling down stars. And then it's that after that where he also says that where he gets ill and after that he meets, it's been a while since I've read Daniel in detail, but I think it's also that way he talks about that Michael comes out only Michael so that he meets this angel or messenger and says only we were fighting the prince of persia So there is a heavenly reality that corresponds to what's going on on the earth, but the concern of the book, only very briefly do you get glimpses into heaven. The whole concern of the book is about what this means for God's Kingdom on earth. That's the burden. And so Daniel's visions concern the outworking of God's Kingdom on the earth. His prayer in chapter 9 is about Jerusalem, the centre of God's Kingdom on the earth. It's a very Old Testament kind of concern. In fact, I would say a very biblical kind of concern. That God is the creator of heaven and earth and the biblical trajectory is towards God coming. to live amongst his people in a new heavens and a new earth, ruling over all the nations, gathering his people from among all the nations. That's the biblical trajectory. And so it's no surprise that we have it in Daniel 7 as well. Yeah, absolutely. And maybe we should touch on the direction of movement of the Son of Man in Daniel 7 and how that affects the events that is taking place and how that's picked up in the Mark allusion of this passage. Yes, yes, I think there's not much more to say about the direction of travel in Daniel 7. It's true in Daniel 7.13. sees with the clouds of heaven, one like a son of man, and he came to the Ancient of Days. And so the direction of travel is dependent on where you locate the Ancient of Days. If you assume that the Ancient of Days is in heaven, then the direction of travel will be either he's moving about in the heavens, that's what... John Collins says in his Daniel Commentary, or he's moving from Earth to Heaven. But if, as I've suggested, the Ancient of Days has come to establish his throne on the Earth, then the direction of travel will have the Earth as its destination. And I think that's confirmed for us if we come across to Mark 8.38, because there's a second allusion there. And it's interesting, both R.T. France and N.T. Wright recognise this secondary allusion. but don't give it much weight. Because in Mark 8.38 Jesus says, Son of Man will be ashamed, of those who are ashamed of him, when he comes in the glory of his Father with the holy angels. Now the allusion to Daniel 7 is clear, the Son of Man comes, that's Daniel 7. But where does this language of coming in glory with the holy angels, where does that come from? The answer is that's coming from Zechariah, the vision of Zechariah chapter 14 verse 5, where Zechariah sees this vision of a final war and final judgement, and the key bit is in Zechariah 14, 5, then the Lord my God will come and all the holy ones with him. Here you've got a coming of God accompanied by holy ones. kedoshim (קְדֹשִׁים) in the Hebrew, οἱ ἅγιοι (hoi hagioi) in the LXX. The Lord my God will come and all the holy ones with him. And quickly following after that is the statement four verses later in Zechariah 14.9. And the Lord will be king over all the earth. Really explicit. The Lord is going to come with his holy ones and be king over all the earth. Even before that in Zechariah 14.3, on that day the Lord's feet shall stand on the Mount of Olives. So again, you've got multiple indications in Zechariah 14 here that this is a coming of God to establish His Kingdom over all the earth. The destination is terrestrial, it's on the earth. And Jesus alludes to that when he talks about coming in the glory of His Father with the holy angels, right? τῶν ἀγγέλων τῶν ἁγίων with the holy angels and quite a number of commentators recognize this illusion including France and Wright and you've got here Zechariah 14.5 and Daniel 7 being put together. Some people see that combination and so there's a really excellent article by Edward Adams, Eddie Adams in the Tyndale Bulletin from about 2005 I think. on this question of the coming of the Son of Man in the Gospel of Mark. And he says that what's going on here is that Daniel 7 has the direction of travel from earth to heaven, but Zechariah 14.5 has the direction of travel from heaven to earth. And what happens in Jesus saying is that Jesus uses Zechariah 14.5 to reverse the direction of the Son of Man's direction of travel. And so Zechariah 14.5 overrules Daniel 7 and creates this sense of coming from heaven to earth. So Adams is arguing against France and Wright, and he's using Zechariah 14.5 to argue that the direction of travel has been reversed. And I think his conclusion is correct, but I think we can make it even stronger. by asking why would Jesus and Mark combine Daniel 7 and Zechariah 14.5 if they've got these conflicting directions. Maybe part of the reason why Jesus combines the two is that they're both talking about the same thing. They both are different visions of God coming from heaven to earth to establish his final kingdom. And that's why Jesus puts them together, because they're two different biblical prophecies that speak about the same event, the great and final coming of God. And I think that's the much better way to read it. And Eddie actually examined my PhD thesis and said, yes, you've persuaded me. I think that that is what's going on. So his article was very helpful for me there, but I think we can make it even stronger by seeing that. these two illusions together create a very strong indication that the Son of Man is coming from heaven to earth, that it is his second coming that Jesus speaks about here. Yeah, because like there's no doubt that Zechariah 14 is about like the final judgment and Jesus' second coming, the Messiah's second coming if you were to use more covenant language. So it's clearly that the Messiah is coming to split the mountain of olives and it's gonna happen one day. It has not happened yet. Yeah, correct. I think one of the other really interesting thing that's going on is in Zechariah 14.5, it's God coming. It's not so much the human Messiah who comes, but it's the Lord my God who comes with the holy angels. And so when Jesus applies that to himself, that's a remarkable Christological claim that he will as the son of the Father, he's going to come in the glory of his Father, as the son of the Father, he will embody the coming of God. So who does he think he is? There's an implicit divine claim there that he can embody God's coming. Yeah. And the reason why I'm saying this also with the Messiah in like 14 is because it's the point that seems to be made in Zechariah 12 verse 10, that they should look, so that's the Jews, they should look to him whom they have pierced for salvation at one eschatological point in the future. Yes. then the events in chapter 13 and 14 will then unfold. Yeah, yeah, that's good. Yeah, Now we've been talking about the so much like strong points and and and I very much agree with you but but I have to play the devil's advocate as well. So yeah. Yeah. So one of the points that argues that that Jesus must be talking about something else than his second coming is is the term γενεά (genea) which we've been talking about. It has been argued that it has a smaller semantic range than γένος (genos) and thus it can only mean generation and not people or race. And what does that mean to our interpretation because that seems to be a problem. Yes, so you get that word here in Mark 8.38, whoever is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, γενεά (genea), γενεᾷ ταύτῃ this generation. You get it also in Mark 13.30 in that verse I spoke about earlier, this generation, ἡ γενεὰ αὕτη, this generation will not pass away until all these things. take place. There is debate about this and you can take it in different ways. Some people would argue that this word can mean a whole collection of people, humanity understood as a whole, uh humanity in opposition to God and so this generation is a very broad term. But that's not generally how it's used. It generally does carry the more restricted sense, as it does in our English translations, of a group of people who share a time span of life, this generation. And I think that is the right way to read it, in both places in Mark, in fact in all of its occurrences in Mark, it refers to this generation being Jesus' own generation, the people who are alive when Jesus lived and died and rose. And so in Mark 8.38, the way I'd read that is, whoever is ashamed to mean my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, it's a warning to his contemporaries that those who are ashamed of him, who don't recognise and receive him as the Messiah, who's come for their salvation, then they will face his judgment when he comes. Of him the Son of Man will be ashamed. This shame language is judgment language. when he returns in glory as judge, then he will be ashamed of them. The fact that he also says, whoever, does broaden it out. And so I think as an application, as Christians, we can apply this verse to others in any generation who are ashamed of him in their generation. So I think the application of it can be broad, but the specific warning here is to those in Jesus' generation who are rejecting him that he will be ashamed of them when he comes. So I don't think that that's any particular problem to the reading that I've suggested we should follow that is speaking about the final judgment in his second coming and it's a warning to those in his own generation that they will face him as their judge when he returns in glory if they're ashamed of him and reject him now. So that's the way One test of this is how do the other gospels interpret this saying? And in Matthew the parallel, it makes that very explicit. Matthew Jesus says, son of Mrs. Matthew 16 27, the son of man is going to come with his angels in the glory of his father and then he will repay each person according to what he has done. This is a final judgment scene. Hmm. Son of Man will come and he will repay each person according to what he has done. So Matthew certainly interprets Jesus' saying as a reference to his second coming for final judgment and that confirms that we're reading Mark the right way because we're reading it the way that Matthew read it. uh If you go to the generation in Mark 13, we can do that as well, that's a little bit, takes a little bit more explanation but do you want to ask anything or clarify anything while we're still in Mark 8? Yeah, I think we will come back to the γενεά (genea) in 13 because I think it's interesting and that's... But I think that there is another problem that potentially could occur in the close context of Mark 8 is actually chapter 9.1 about when Jesus said that some will see him in his glory. So is it the same glory that he's referring to as he just said, would be the natural glory that he's been talking about? So what is going on here? Yeah, good question. So, in Mark, he actually speaks about the Kingdom of God. And similarly, in Matthew 16, 27 and 28. It's 28, isn't it? In Matthew, it has the same import, but it's slightly different language. He says, Truly I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom. So, yes, this seems to be a prophecy that some standing here, some amongst Jesus' will see the fullness of the kingdom, the kingdom of God after it has come with power. They'll see him, in fact, coming in his kingdom, according to Matthew. and they'll see that before they taste death, they'll see it within their own lifetimes. What could this possibly be? Well, I think it's telling that the immediate uh context, what happens immediately after this in all three synoptic gospels, in Matthew and Mark and Luke, and we haven't talked about Luke so much but it's the same there, is the transfiguration. That after six days Jesus took that within Peter and James and John, Not all of those standing there, but some of those standing there, Peter and James and John, he took them up on a mountain by themselves and he was transfigured before them and they saw him in his glory. So what they're seeing in the transfiguration is a preview of Jesus' second coming. They're seeing him as he will be when he returns in glory and power to judge and to reign to bring in the fullness of his kingdom. Hmm. That's been a very common, by no means the only interpretation. There are many other possibilities that people have entertained. ah They'll see the Kingdom of God. Is Jesus talking about, they'll see the Kingdom of God after it has come with power, Mark 9.1. Is he talking about they'll see Him, His death on the cross when the Kingdom of God comes? Is he talking about His resurrection when they'll see the power of the Kingdom of God? Is he talking about His ascension and the outpouring of the Spirit? Is he talking about the growth of the church? All of those are possibilities that have been entertained and you can make a case for them. But for my money the immediate context that goes straight into the transfiguration is decisive. That what they see in the transfiguration is a preview of Jesus' final coming in glory. And I think Peter interprets it that way, where Peter in his second letter to Peter 1 Hmm. says, he refers to this event and he says, 2 Peter 1, 16, we didn't follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming, and there it's parousia, a semi-technical term for his return, the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For when he received glory from God the Father, and the voice was born to him by the majestic glory, this is my beloved Son with whom I'm well pleased. Peter's talking about the transfiguration. He says we ourselves heard this very voice from heaven on the holy mountain. And so we've made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ because we've seen a preview of it in the transfiguration. I think that's probably the best way to read Jesus saying in Mark 9. yeah, I think so too. Yeah. And I think in some ways it actually explains what will go happen in the end. And to jump to a completely different part of the New Testament, it seems like that's the vision that John gets in the apocalypse. So in Revelation, that is to glorify Christ. Yeah, absolutely. Yeah. We could fill that out as well. And so there's an excellent recent book by Patrick Schreiner on the transfiguration. And he makes what I think is a good point that what they see in the transfiguration is both a manifestation of his eternal glory as the eternal son of the father and a preview of his future glory as the final Adam who will come in power. for final judgment. It's both of those things at once. But in this discussion where we're speaking about Jesus' second coming, I think we're going to emphasise that second element, that they're seeing a preview of His final return in glory. And you're right, John also sees a preview of that in Revelation chapter 1, in the glorious Son of Man who appears to him. Yes, exactly. And maybe going back to Mark, how does the Mark and Motive of the coming of the Son of Man functions across the Gospel and is it kind of is it consistent within the Gospel? Yeah, I think it is. It functions as a warning and as an encouragement. That it's a warning to not be ashamed of him in this adulterous and sinful generation, but rather to repent and believe, to use Jesus' own words from Mark 1, 14 and 15. The kingdom of God is at hand, so repent and believe the good news. And the good news concerning himself, that Jesus... himself is the content of the Good News, his life, his death, his resurrection. Repent and believe the Good News that God's Kingdom is coming in and through him. So turn away from sin, embrace God's salvation coming in him. Don't be ashamed of him, because if you're ashamed of him in this adulterous and sinful generation, then the Son of Man will be ashamed of you. It functions in the same way in Mark 13, 26, where it's an encouragement and a warning. So in Mark 13, 26, then at the end, they'll see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory, and he'll send out his angels and gather his elect from the four wings. And so that when Jesus applies it, be on guard, verse 33, keep awake, you don't know when the time will come, be ready for his return. How? By repenting from sin and by embracing him in faith. going back to 1.14 and 15, repent and believe the gospel so that you're ready for his return, so that you're ready for the final judgment. And if you do, then you'll find yourself among his elect, those whom he will gather from the four winds of the earth and the ends of heaven, you'll be those who are gathered into his presence to enjoy his presence in the end, rather than those who come under his judgment. So it's a warning of judgment and encouragement to faith. And the same way that the last one in Mark 14.62 functions in the same way, here it's a warning to the high priest. The high priest asked, you the Christ, the son of the blessed? And Jesus said, I am, and you will see the son of man seated at the right hand of power and coming on the clouds of heaven. It's a warning that you will see him coming in judgment, you who have rejected him. And so again, it's a warning of judgment and encouragement to faith. Yeah. yes, I do think it does function consistently in those three references across the gospel. Yeah, that's, that's, that's enormously helpful. And now we can return to the, the γενεά (genea) in Chapter 13, because now we are here. So, R.T. France argues here that again, that it refers to heavenly kingdom, but what is it actually going on in text? this is that really what the text is saying? Yeah, that's a great question. This is a difficult passage. think we have to recognise that. And there have been a range of different interpretations down through history. A couple of resources before we get into it. I'd point people to William Lane's commentary. I think that's a little bit dated now in the NICNT series, but that's, I think, still among the best commentaries on the Gospel of Mark. And the reading I'm about to give you, he'll give you more detail on what I'm about to say. Yeah, yeah. at more popular level, I've actually just put out a series of 12 studies on Jesus' speech on the Mount of Olives with Crossway. It's called Jesus' Speech on the Mount of Olives, 12 Bible studies. And so if you want to do it at that level in a Bible study group, it's Bible studies with notes. Hopefully that's a helpful way in for people into this passage. The key is to recognise where the speech starts in Mark chapter 13. where Jesus is sitting on the Mount of Olives and the disciples look at the temple and are amazed. say, Mark 13, 1, look teacher what wonderful stones, what wonderful buildings. And Jesus says, do you see these great buildings? There won't be one left here, there won't be left here one stone upon another, they will not be thrown down. Jerusalem will be destroyed, the temple will be destroyed. And then verse 13.3 as he sat on the Mount of Olives, Peter and James and John and Andrew asked him privately, tell us when will these things be? And notice that phrase, πότε ταῦτα ἔσται (pote tauta estai) ταῦτα (tauta) these things. When will these things be? And then it's emphasised. What will be the sign when all these things are about to take place? And there it's πάντα ταῦτα all these things, πάντα ταῦτα. So when will these things be and what will someone all these things and Mark is there helping us to understand that these things are these things associated with the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple and that's the question the disciples are asking him when will all these things associated with the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple when will they take place and Jesus then launches into the speech and he answers that question but he also gives them more than they bargained for. Hmm. them when all these things will take place, but he also shows them more of the future. Beyond the destruction of Jerusalem and God's judgment on Jerusalem, he points them all the way forward to God's final judgment when the Son of Man will come. And so the speech is structured in this A-B-A-B structure. Destruction of Jerusalem, then the coming of the Son of Man. Destruction of Jerusalem, then the coming of the Son of Man. And so verses 5 and following are talking about all these things that will occur leading up to and associated with the destruction of Jerusalem.

That becomes really clear in verse 14: 1:16:09

when you see the abomination of desolation standing where he ought not to be… those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. Notice how specific that is. Let the one who's on the house stop not go down. Because great tribulation. is coming on Judea, on Jerusalem. And that's going to happen in the middle of history. Verse 19, in those days there'll be such tribulation as has not been from the beginning of creation that God created until now and never will be. There'll be history after that great tribulation. So, the destruction of Jerusalem is coming. Watch out for that. When you see it coming, flee to the mountains. Hmm. Then in verse 24 we get a new topic. So that was all the A-piece, destruction of Jerusalem. Now the B-piece. 24, in those days after that tribulation. Oh, now we're speaking about a new period of time. Those days after that tribulation and a new event. The sun will be darkened, the moon will not give its light, the stars will be falling from heaven, the powers of the heaven will be shaken, and then they'll see the Son of Man coming on the clouds. So notice those... time markers in those days after that tribulation. Notice also the contrite, the move from the second person to the third person. Back in verse 13-14, it was when you see the destruction of desolation, the abomination of desolations, when you disciples see destruction coming on Jerusalem. When we get to verse 26, it's third person, then they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds. Who's they? Hmm. a different group of people in a different period of time. So, destruction's coming on Jerusalem. Then, after that, a separate event chronologically distinct the coming of the Son of Man. Then, with the lesson for the fig tree, we go back to the A again. A, B, A, B. So, verse 28. From the fig tree, learn this lesson. As soon as its branch comes out, you know that the summer is near. So, when you see... These things taking place. what are these things? The destruction of Jerusalem. Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. What are all these things that are going to take place within a generation? Well, he's told us what all these things are at the beginning of the speech. It's all these things associated with the destruction of Jerusalem. All these things will take place within a generation. Now back to the B. Verse 32, but concerning that day and hour, which day and hour? The separate day and hour of the coming of the Son of Man. Concerning that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. But keep awake, be ready for the coming of the Son of Man. So, A. Destruction of Jerusalem. B. The coming of the Son of Man. A. When? Within a generation. B. When? No one knows. It's really striking that Jesus knows when Jerusalem will be destroyed within a generation, but he doesn't know the day and the hour of the coming of Son of Man. there's this distinction between the two events runs the whole way through. And so if you read it like that, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place, verse 30. It's referring to the destruction of Jerusalem that did happen within a generation, but it's a... chronologically distinct from the coming of the Son of Man, which will occur at a yet future point and at unknown time when He'll come in glory and power. Yeah, that's very helpful. And yeah, shows that we have to pay close attention to what's going on in the text. Yeah, but how does that reading in Mark compared to the parallels in Matthew and Luke? So for example, Matthew 24, 23 to 39 and... Look 21, 23 to 35. Yeah, again, this is a long discussion if we're going to do it properly, because these are all three of them complicated passages. But let me just give you the short version, which is I think all three synoptic discourses, Matthew 24 and 25, Mark 13 and Luke 21, they all have the same basic structure. They all include Jesus' prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem within a generation. they all look beyond that to the final day when the Son of Man will return in power and glory. And so, although some of the details are slightly different, the overall outline and structure of the speech is the same in all three Synoptic Gospels. And just to pick up a couple of things that Matthew and Luke emphasise that supports this reading. In Matthew, There are additional things that Jesus says connected with the coming of the Son of Man that make it clear that he's talking about his second coming in glory. The Son of Man, Matthew 24, 30. You'll see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory and then he'll send out his angels with a loud trumpet call. Now, that's unique in Matthew, it's not in Mark or in Luke, the trumpet call. And in the Old Testament, the trumpet call is associated with the coming of God for judgment. And so again, this is an indication that we've got God coming in judgment here. In the Son of Man coming in judgment. It's an eschatological theophany, an end time coming of God. And Matthew then has... records a whole bunch of Jesus teaching that focuses on that final event. When we come across to Matthew 25, the parable of the ten virgins, the parable of the ten talents, the parable of the sheep and the goats, all of those, I think to most readers, make it crystal clear that Jesus is here talking about the final coming. Matthew 25, 31, when the Son of Man comes in his glory and all the angels with him, then he'll sit on his glorious throne and before him will be gathered all the nations and he'll separate the people one from another. It's hard to see this as anything but final judgment and that confirms for us that the coming of the Son of Man is his final coming, his second coming in glory and power for judgment. In Luke, if we touch on that briefly, you get the same same kind of thing going on. Luke really helpfully caches out the enigmatic phrase, the abomination of desolation. In Mark and in Matthew Jesus says, when you see the abomination that causes desolation, it's a phrase from Daniel, it's a bit cryptic, let the reader understand, we have in Matthew and in Mark. uh Luke explains that for his predominantly Gentile readers, Luke 21.20. When you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies. Okay, that's fairly clear. Know that its desolation has come near. Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. Ah, okay, he's prophesying the destruction of Jerusalem. These are days of vengeance to fulfill all that this is God's judgment on his faithless covenant people, the people of Israel who rejected the Messiah in that generation. Verse 23, there will be great distress upon the earth, the ESV has, but it's epitest guess, it could be upon the land, and I think that's right, there will be great distress upon the land, and wrath against this people, toalao tuto, this people, it's judgment coming on Jesus' contemporaries for their rejection of the Messiah. They'll fall by the edge of the sword, they'll be led captive among the nations, this is what happened in AD 70. Jerusalem will be trampled underfoot by the Gentiles. But then, time period opens up until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled. That's Luke 21, 24. And then what happens next? Well, he speaks about the coming of the Son of Man. There'll be sign in sun and moon and stars. You know, the coming of the Son of Man and the destruction of Jerusalem are related in that they're both manifestations of God's judgment. But one is God's judgment in the first century on Jerusalem. The other is God's judgment at the end on all the nations. And so Jesus puts them together in this speech because they're both about judgment that is coming, but they're also distinguished chronologically as two different instances of judgment. And yeah, there's a lot more we could say there, but that's the big picture. yeah, that's very helpful for for now and how to tie these things together in terms of our conversation. I just wanted to highlight in a previous episode, so this podcast Tyler Hoogland has argued that when the kingdom of God is investigated outside of the Gospels, in early Christianity before 150 AD, it becomes clear that kingdom of God goes where the king goes. and thus when Jesus is not present neither is the kingdom. Does that help explain how the gospels are using Daniel 7 in relation to Jesus' return? Yes, met Tyler at, was it at Tyndale or was it at another conference? Yeah, yeah, excellent. Yeah, and I really enjoyed his paper and conversations there. I didn't hear this aspect of his argument, so all I've got is what you've just given me then. God's kingdom goes where the king goes. Yes, I can see that argument. I think I'd want to emphasise that... At the end of the Gospels, Jesus does ascend to heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. And so maybe we can say something like the headquarters of God's Kingdom are at the right hand of the Father, where the King goes. But Jesus in the Gospels also emphasises that as he goes, he doesn't leave his people alone. In the Great Commission that we spoke about earlier. Surely I am with you always to the very end of the age. How can that be true if he's bodily ascended to the right hand of the Father? I think the answer must be that he continues present amongst his people by his spirit. And so he is present by his spirit. And therefore the Kingdom of God is still manifest on earth uh wherever the Lord is at work by his spirit. and especially as he calls people in repentance and faith and gathers them into the church, there we find manifestations of the Kingdom of God on earth. So I wouldn't want to say, I don't know Tyler's thesis in any more detail, but I wouldn't want to suggest that the Kingdom of God is absent from our present experience. No, those of us who are in Christ are in the Kingdom. Yeah, it's a more complicated argument, but I think there's some interesting things in terms of like how Paul uses it, for example, and that he seems to avoid using it about that we should be kingdom ready in a sense. That's how Tyler would phrase it. And it's not that the kingdom, that God Jesus is not present with us and that is not working, it's that when is the establishment of the kingdom happening? Right. Yeah. that's what he's sort of like, it seems to be the concern of the earliest sources. And there seems to be a shift around Constantine, that's what he argues, in how this is emphasized. And he also tries to see that you maybe can be hold both together, but he seems to see that the earliest Christians seems to have had a slightly different view. Yeah, fascinating. I'd love to talk more about that. I think just in terms of New Testament, I think we need to say, yes, absolutely, the final manifestation of the kingdom is yet before us. It's waiting for the day when the Son of Man will come on the clouds in power and glory. Then the kingdom of God will come in all its fullness. And Jesus actually speaks about that at the Last Supper. This is another place in the Gospels where he does. speak about the final kingdom and he's uh surely he says at the last supper i won't eat of the fruit of the vine until i drink it new with you where in the kingdom of God right he's speaking there about the the final kingdom when he will be present with his people that's the fullness of the kingdom uh and yet so yes there is that eschatological end time focus the the kingdom has begun in christ We're not yet in the fullness. The fullness is yet to come. And we rightly want to emphasize that. And we're being called into that kingdom. I think we can also say that because the King is at work by his spirit, those of us who are in him, in Christ by faith, and therefore in the Church, are in the kingdom. But maybe that's a longer conversation. Yeah, I think it might be a longer conversation, especially when you look at some of Paul's language, especially his irony and talking about the Corinthians and I think it's one Corinthians four. There are some interesting things there. Yeah. Yeah, where he's Kingdom in its current form is certainly cruciform. The church and the Christian life is characterized by service and suffering and dying and weakness rather than strength and glory and power. Yeah. and so it would actually maybe be interesting if we heard and Tyler had a conversation about that. It be interesting. Yeah, but maybe we should instead ask the question, how can each of the listeners who have been listening to or viewed our conversation here today apply what we've been talking about so that every day walk with Christ? Yeah, I think the takeaways for me are one, to uh just trust the Lord's promise that He will return. That uh this is not merely something that the Apostles promise us, as significant as that is, as the apostolic writings are God's Word to us. So that would be enough. But in addition, in His kindness, we have Jesus' own words, our Lord's own promise that He will return. And that for me adds weight to the promise, strengthens the promise. This is a whole Bible promise that God will come and dwell with His people and make everything new and judge sin and death. And therefore we have our Lord's own promise that He will come. So hold on to that. And that ought to warn us, as I've said, to repent of sin, to walk in faith. It also ought to comfort us that when he comes, he'll gather all of his elect, as he says, from the four winds. Even those who have died will be gathered. How will those who have died be gathered in the resurrection as he raises his people to meet him when he comes? And so that ought to be both a challenge and a comfort to us. And therefore we ought to be always ready for his return. Stay awake, he says. Don't get bogged down in the in the sins of life in this world, the cares and concerns of life in this world, but keep our eyes focused on the promise of his return and live for that day. Live to please him. Seek his kingdom first. Those are the kinds of applications that come out of uh Trusting and looking forward to Jesus' return as he has promised. Yeah, yeah, I think that's beautiful. I don't think I can add much more to that. I think that's an excellent application. Thank you for joining me on the podcast, Murray. Pleasure Daniel. Enjoy chatting. But likewise, and to you guys out there, I'll see you in the next one. But before you go, if you enjoyed this podcast and you want more people to see it, please subscribe and leave a like. It really helps us create more episodes like this one. I really appreciate it. Thank you. Have a great day and I'll see you in the next one.